The Unification Of Germany And Italy In The 60's

In a letter to an Italian friend, Napoleon wrote, “I do not wish to see Italy united. I want only independence. Unity would bring danger to me…” (Doc 11). Despite all of the bitter resentment, Cavour was pleasantly surprised when the northern and central states of Italy called for a fusion, and he returned to power in 1860 (McKay et al

The majority of people thought Bismarck was a German enthusiast but in reality he was Prussian. The idea of creating a unified Germany developed only gradually in his mind as an addition the strengthening of Prussia. With this objective in mind, Bismarck transformed the small country of Prussia into a large European superpower with an unbeatable army. To Bismarck, enemies and alliances were only considered important if they were convenient at the time. He was practical and an opportunistic, taking advantage of situations as they developed and prepared to act in many different directions depending on the outcome. For instance, In 1862 Bismarck was appointed chief minister of Prussia; however this title alone was

By 1871 both the kingdom of Italy and the empire of Germany were united. Even though both countries used popular trends to that time, both liberalism and nationalism, the process unifying these two countries was very different. The end result was Germany emerging as a strong nation and Italy appropriately, the weaker.

Whoever ignores this love of the individual regions of Italy will always build on sand.” (DOC 2) People believed the diverse social classes and power would not make for a unified country. Count Camillo Benso di Cavour, a politician from Piedmont-Sardinia, said, “Active power resides almost exclusively in the middle class and part of the upper class, both of which have ultraconservative interests to defend.” (DOC 4) Daniele Manin, a politician from Venice, wrote, “Peoples who have different origins and customs should not be forced together, because otherwise civil war will follow the war of independence.” (DOC 6) People against unification felt that bringing the diverse states together would cause more problems and do more harm than good. There were obvious pros and cons to the unification if Italy, but some civilians were on the fence.

As president, Bismarck led Germany into unification through his opportunism and his various policies. Charismatic yet aggressive by nature, Bismarck was known for his ability to seize opportunities and manipulate situations to his advantage. It is debatable whether or not Germany would have achieved unification under the power of anyone other Bismarck. In his 1996 book The Problem of the German Nation State, Wolfgang Mommsen said, “Bismarck’s policies- admirable or satanic... occupy centre stage.” This is particularly true for his infamous policy of “blood and iron”. Also, Bismarck’s diplomatic abilities are able to be seen when looking at his foreign policy of 1871 to 1890. Bismarck’s policies and opportunism are predominantly evident when looking at the Three Wars.

Otto von Bismarck is widely known as the first modern politician. Because of this, his interpretation of conservatism is different and is the first of its kind. The reason Bismarck represents a new and different kind of conservatism is that unlike traditional conservatives, Bismarck is willing to adapt his views to fit the people's current needs. While Bismarck's methods can be considered traditionally conservative in his early days as a political leader, with things such as the Anti-Socialist Acts, by looking deeper and analyzing what he did later in life shows that he was a more modern conservative. Some examples of Bismarck’s modern conservatism were his restraint on letting Germany go to war with any other country, and his policy of separation of church and state. Compared to other leaders like Napoleon III, Bismarck had the ability to plan and invest in Germany’s future. Bismarck supported this by being able to change his views and ideas when it became necessary. Bismarck’s time was born when the Franco-Prussian war began. This is what led to Bismarck becoming so famous at the time, as his military victories were heard of all over

3. In the mid-nineteenth century, Italy wasn’t unified. Italy was made up of independent states that nationalist wanted unified, but failed. Mazzini was “the most important nationalist leader in Europe and brought new fervor to the cause” (690). Mazzini desperately wanted Italy to be united and it finally was and became the Italian Republic. In 1860, the country shaped boot became a nation-state. After the war with Austria, “the forces of romantic republican nationalism compelled Cavour to pursue the complete unification of northern and southern Italy” (691).

Bismarck had brought Germany closer to unification, Thus, meaning Bismarck had an important role in the progression of the unification of Germany. Some historians argue whether or not Bismarck was an opportunist or a planner. In the case of the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 it is evident that Bismarck deliberately planned the outbreak of war against Austria. In William Carr’s Germany 1815-1945 he quotes a conversation between Bismarck to Disraeli in 1862: “when the army has been brought to such a state as to command a respect then I shall take the first opportunity to declare war with Austria” proving that Bismarck had planned to go to war with Austria. but he also took advantage of an opportunity which enabled him to go to war with Austria as he stated. Therefore Bismarck can be viewed as both a planner and an opportunist. The wars of unification helped unite Germany as all members of the Bund came together and fought as one in all of these wars.

Prince Otto von Bismarck was seen as both a political genius and a power monger, like a German version of Alexander the Great by the people. Bismarck was a conservative, who used the people around him to reach his goals; and in doing so, he pitted people against one another. According to the book 19th Century Germany by John Breuilly, modern historians have found it very hard “to separate the man from his achievements” (Breuilly 172). The historians have run into a roadblock that consists mostly of “Bismarck’s individuality and his responsibility for the political development of the Empire” (Breuilly 172). Bismarck was known to support nationalism and patriotism, and he believed in the Burschenschaften or student organizations. He also believed in the concept of faith in power, more in ideas. Bismarck only cared for two things: Prussia and Prussian power, and he would do anything to obtain Prussian domination. Although Bismarck did not care for Germany, he was all for German Unification. Historians cannot decide if Bismarck’s legacy is positive or negative but they agree that he was a “brilliant and shrewd tactician who succeeded in postponing the problem of political mobilization for 60 years” (Breuilly 172). In Otto von Bismarck, some people saw a great man who was ahead of his time, while others saw nothing more than a bloodthirsty power monger, who wanted a united Germany to

Otto von Bismarck was the prime minister of Germany during the time of German unification, formerly the prime minister of Prussia. Bismarck struck quite the nationalist chord in the German peoples, convincing the southern German states to join the the northern ones. He was known as a hardcore conservative, however he was a practitioner of realpolitik, and was able to approve policies that appealed to different ideologies for the sake of the country. Otto von Bismarck’s specific brand of conservatism was different than classic conservatism in that Bismarck attempted to appeal more to the working class, and he had a good few liberal policies. However, Bismarck also had traditionally conservative ideas, such as suppressing opposing views.

Otto Von Bismarck was a great leader in the unification of Germany. His skill as a diplomat was unrivalled during his reign as chancellor of Prussia. The mastery he showed in foreign policy was such that he was able to outwit all other powers and make their leaders appear inadequate.

had one of the best education rates to be seen in a long time. Along

Italy and Germany differ the most with their foreign policy. Cavour tends to use major foreign powers as ally in unification. This strategy is employed in their war with Austria. Cavour flatters and impresses Napoleon III in the Crimean War. This new relationship leads to the support that annexed Piedmont from Austrian powers.

During the 19th century, Nationalism was a big player when it came to unity in Europe. The man who played the main role in unification in Germany was Otto von Bismarck. He made progression through three wars. The question people still ask today is, did Otto von Bismarck plan to unify Germany, or did he just take advantage of the opportunities that fell into his lap. Otto Von Bismarck was most definitely a planner as shown through countless actions and statements shown threw his time of power during the three wars. The first war was the Danish war were Germany with the help of Austria took control of the provinces of Schleswig and Holstein. The second war was the Austrian-Prussian war, where there was a disagreement over administrations of Schleswig. The third and final war was the Franco-Prussian war, were France was determined to prevent German Unification.

The Italian Unification is a time period during which Italy becomes unified as one country. While trying to unify the country there were obstacles faced and conquered by Mazzini, Cavour, and Garibaldi as they continued to unify Italy. They pushed Nationalism on the people. The problems that were faced during the time of the unification were the Austrian occupation of Lombardy and Venice. Also, the land still belonged to the Pope and not the government which meant that it did not really belong to everyone and didn’t symbolize unification. The last problem is there is an existence of many independent states which means there were states ruling themselves.